Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 22
Filtrar
3.
Schweiz Arch Tierheilkd ; 155(7): 399-404, 2013 Jul.
Artículo en Alemán | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23823744

RESUMEN

The outbreak of foot and mouth disease (FMD) in Great Britain in 2001 let to discussions and especially emergency vaccination was deemed as an alternative to the culling of vast numbers of healthy animals. The project emergency vaccination for FMD in Switzerland was conducted to compare the effectiveness of conventional control strategies during a FMD outbreak alone and with ring vaccination of 3 km and 10 km, respectively. The results of this project showed that emergency vaccination conducted at the beginning of an epidemic was not favorable compared to conventional disease control strategy in Switzerland. In case of an advanced FMD epidemic, a 10 km ring vaccination could support the disease control in a positive way. However, the goal of emergency vaccination to save animal live can hardly be achieved due to actual legal basis and the consequent restriction measures within vaccination zones which will lead to welfare culling.


L'épizootie de fièvre aphteuse en Grande Bretagne en 2001 a montré que les abatages de masse d'animaux sains sont plus en plus critiquée. On discute régulièrement de la vaccination d'urgence comme mesure permettant de réduire le nombre d'animaux à tuer en cas d'épizootie. Dans le cadre du projet vaccination d'urgence FA suisse, on a comparé l'effet de la seule lutte conventionnelle avec celui d'une vaccination d'urgence «vaccination to live¼ dans un périmètre de 3 km (GV3) respectivement 10 km (GV10) quant à la durée et à l'importance du foyer. Au début d'une épizootie, la vaccination d'urgence supplémentaire n'apporte pas d'avantage face à la lutte conventionnelle. Si une vaccination V10 est pratiquée plus tardivement, elle peut dans certains cas amener une diminution et un raccourcissement de l'épizootie. Le but visant, grâce à la vaccination d'urgence, à tuer moins d'animaux ne peut toutefois pas, dans les conditions actuelles, être atteint car vu les fortes limitations du trafic d'animaux à l'intérieur des zones de vaccination, on doit compter avec des abattages pour des raisons de protections des animaux.


Asunto(s)
Brotes de Enfermedades/veterinaria , Fiebre Aftosa/prevención & control , Vacunación/veterinaria , Sacrificio de Animales/legislación & jurisprudencia , Animales , Brotes de Enfermedades/legislación & jurisprudencia , Brotes de Enfermedades/prevención & control , Urgencias Médicas/veterinaria , Fiebre Aftosa/epidemiología , Suiza/epidemiología , Vacunación/legislación & jurisprudencia , Vacunación/métodos
4.
PLoS One ; 11(1): e0146298, 2016.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26726808

RESUMEN

Human-wildlife conflict is a global issue. Attempts to manage this conflict impact upon wild animal welfare, an issue receiving little attention until relatively recently. Where human activities harm animal welfare these effects should be minimised where possible. However, little is known about the welfare impacts of different wildlife management interventions, and opinions on impacts vary widely. Welfare impacts therefore need to be assessed objectively. Our objectives were to: 1) establish whether an existing welfare assessment model could differentiate and rank the impacts of different wildlife management interventions (for decision-making purposes); 2) identify and evaluate any additional benefits of making formal welfare assessments; and 3) illustrate issues raised by application of the model. We applied the welfare assessment model to interventions commonly used with rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus), moles (Talpa europaea) and crows (Corvus corone) in the UK. The model ranked interventions for rabbits (least impact first: fencing, head shot, chest shot) and crows (shooting, scaring, live trapping with cervical dislocation). For moles, managing molehills and tunnels scored least impact. Both spring trapping, and live trapping followed by translocation, scored greater impacts, but these could not be compared directly as they scored on different axes of the model. Some rankings appeared counter-intuitive, highlighting the need for objective formal welfare assessments. As well as ranking the humaneness of interventions, the model highlighted future research needs and how Standard Operating Procedures might be improved. The model is a milestone in assessing wildlife management welfare impacts, but our research revealed some limitations of the model and we discuss likely challenges in resolving these. In future, the model might be developed to improve its utility, e.g. by refining the time-scales. It might also be used to reach consensus among stakeholders about relative welfare impacts or to identify ways of improving wildlife management practice in the field.


Asunto(s)
Sacrificio de Animales/métodos , Bienestar del Animal , Cuervos , Topos , Control de Plagas/métodos , Conejos , Sacrificio de Animales/ética , Sacrificio de Animales/legislación & jurisprudencia , Distribución Animal , Bienestar del Animal/ética , Bienestar del Animal/legislación & jurisprudencia , Animales , Conducta Animal , Eutanasia Animal/ética , Eutanasia Animal/métodos , Actividades Humanas , Modelos Teóricos , Control de Plagas/ética , Control de Plagas/legislación & jurisprudencia , Restricción Física/ética , Restricción Física/instrumentación , Restricción Física/métodos , Reino Unido , Heridas y Lesiones/prevención & control , Heridas y Lesiones/veterinaria , Heridas por Arma de Fuego/veterinaria
5.
PLoS One ; 11(1): e0141983, 2016.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26731652

RESUMEN

Increased popularity of recreational activities in natural areas has led to the need to better understand their impacts on wildlife. The majority of research conducted to date has focused on behavioral effects from individual recreations, thus there is a limited understanding of the potential for population-level or cumulative effects. Brown bears (Ursus arctos) are the focus of a growing wildlife viewing industry and are found in habitats frequented by recreationists. Managers face difficult decisions in balancing recreational opportunities with habitat protection for wildlife. Here, we integrate results from empirical studies with expert knowledge to better understand the potential population-level effects of recreational activities on brown bears. We conducted a literature review and Delphi survey of brown bear experts to better understand the frequencies and types of recreations occurring in bear habitats and their potential effects, and to identify management solutions and research needs. We then developed a Bayesian network model that allows managers to estimate the potential effects of recreational management decisions in bear habitats. A higher proportion of individual brown bears in coastal habitats were exposed to recreation, including photography and bear-viewing than bears in interior habitats where camping and hiking were more common. Our results suggest that the primary mechanism by which recreation may impact brown bears is through temporal and spatial displacement with associated increases in energetic costs and declines in nutritional intake. Killings in defense of life and property were found to be minimally associated with recreation in Alaska, but are important considerations in population management. Regulating recreation to occur predictably in space and time and limiting recreation in habitats with concentrated food resources reduces impacts on food intake and may thereby, reduce impacts on reproduction and survival. Our results suggest that decisions managers make about regulating recreational activities in time and space have important consequences for bear populations. The Bayesian network model developed here provides a new tool for managers to balance demands of multiple recreational activities while supporting healthy bear populations.


Asunto(s)
Recreación , Ursidae , Sacrificio de Animales/legislación & jurisprudencia , Sacrificio de Animales/estadística & datos numéricos , Distribución Animal , Animales , Teorema de Bayes , Conducta Animal , Conservación de los Recursos Naturales , Técnica Delphi , Ecosistema , Europa (Continente) , Conducta Alimentaria , Femenino , Abastecimiento de Alimentos , Humanos , Masculino , Desnutrición/etiología , Desnutrición/veterinaria , Modelos Teóricos , América del Norte , Propiedad/legislación & jurisprudencia , Recreación/economía , Reproducción , Investigación
8.
Hig. aliment ; 33(288/289): 1662-1665, abr.-maio 2019.
Artículo en Portugués | LILACS, VETINDEX | ID: biblio-1482378

RESUMEN

A cadeia de produção de carne de frango brasileira é uma das mais importantes do mundo e no Maranhão ocorreu uma expansão do mercado, principalmente em São Luís, com aumento do consumo consideravelmente na região nos últimos anos. Porém, devido à falta de fiscalização e inspeção, nem toda carne de frango que chega a mesa do consumidor é oriunda de estabelecimentos que atendem as normas exigidas. Este trabalho teve como objetivo avaliar as condições higienicossanitárias do abate clandestino de 26 boxes em feiras e mercados da cidade de São Luís – MA, através da aplicação de um checklist com itens como: manipuladores, instalações e equipamentos, água, manejo de resíduos e controle integrado de pragas. Os resultados obtidos mostram as péssimas condições de higiene dos estabelecimentos, colocando em risco a qualidade das carnes de frango das feiras e mercados avaliados.


Asunto(s)
Humanos , Animales , Sacrificio de Animales/legislación & jurisprudencia , Carne/normas , Lista de Verificación/normas , Manipulación de Alimentos/legislación & jurisprudencia , Pollos
16.
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA